/m/red_sox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

How much is a pure two month rental, even a very good one, worth in this day and age? A B prospect? I think that return makes sense for the Red Sox, but I could also see that counterargument that it's not worth the intangible cost of losing Lester for the rest of the season.

I don't think there is much in the way of intangible cost to trading Lester. Their fans have already given up on the season and even the casuals would probably be fine with picking up a B prospect, and Lester has said on the record that he'd happily re-sign with the team if they happened to offer him the most money--though they certainly will not.

Fans aren't going to show up in September whether Lester starts five games for them that month or not.

I don't think there is much in the way of intangible cost to trading Lester. Their fans have already given up on the season and even the casuals would probably be fine with picking up a B prospect, and Lester has said on the record that he'd happily re-sign with the team if they happened to offer him the most money--though they certainly will not.

Fans aren't going to show up in September whether Lester starts five games for them that month or not.

Concur. I don't see how trading Lester affects their fanbase, or their chance of resigning him.

Free agency is pretty simple, if your club is at all an attractive destination; offer the most money, and you get the player.

Oh no, it's more complicated than that. They need a designated payee to get the union of their backs. It is a win if the guy is actually good, but in emergencies they can throw random millions at just about anyone.

As a diehard Red Sox fan, talking with other diehard Sox fans in New England every day, believe me: the fan base doesn't give a #### about the rest of this season. We'd like the team to do this:

Team: "We'll give you a 5 yr deal at $24m a year; we'll do a 6th year that vests if you stay healthy and productive in years four and five at the same money, or it will be a buyout of $5m. That makes this a 5/$125m deal. Agree to it by 9 am on the 31st, or we will trade you for prospects to a good team, and then after the season, if you are still healthy, we will make a similar offer."

If they do that, and Lester declines, then nobody is going to be mad if they trade him. In fact, I will be more likely to follow the team in the final two months if they play more of their young players, because that will be interesting. You want to trade Lackey, who has a ridiculously cheap 2015 contract, for more talent? I'd listen to that. Let me see some of these guys between August 1st and the end of the year:

Red Sox might do it because Cespedes could be a good long-term fit, a qualifying offer candidate

Cespedes cannot be offered a qualifying offer because he would not be eligible for free agency. The contract prohibits offering arbitration after it expires next year, but you cannot decline to offer arbitration and then make a qualifying offer. It doesn't work that way.

For Beane to make the above trade, he would have to accept the following:

1) Lester and Victorino help the A's more than Cespedes does this year.
2) A reasonably healthy Victorino is comparable to Cespedes in 2015.
3) Adding $3MM to the 2014 payroll and $4MM to 2015 does not constrain the A's roster. This assumes the Red Sox would not send any money.
4) Giving up a potential sandwich pick from a Cespedes QO is an acceptable opportunity cost.

Trading Russell for Samardzija/Hammel indicates to me that Beane sees this year as his best chance to date of winning a World Series. In that light, I think the assumed risk and opportunity cost would be worth it to him.

Regarding Stanton, I didn't know he had three years of arbitration left. The last two years may be relatively expensive, in which case they'd look to trade him in the next year or so. If so, that makes the above proposal more realistic.

Plus, Miami might be willing to sign Cespedes. I'd imagine they'd be intrigued by the possibility of building around two Cuban stars in Fernandez and Cespedes.

The hilarious thing is that's also the rotation for next year...assuming the Sox don't waste 2/30 on some POS/Dempster-Peavy type

I think the best argument for keeping Lackey is that he will be a reliable, sturdy, above-average starter making $500K next year, and his dependability will help balance out what will be a very young back of the rotation. Remember that Workman and De La Rosa have done some starting pitching for Boston already this year, and generally pretty well. Starting the season with Ranaudo (or Steven Wright, a knuckleballer in AAA who has been excellent, but is not treated as a prospect) is what is really unsettling. Lackey avoids that problem.

One other thing: The Red Sox may not be having a very good year in 2014, but they have an amazing amount of starting pitching depth in the upper minors. For much of the year, they've had five guys in AAA that are all legitimate starting prospects (De La Rosa, Ranaudo, Webster, Workman, and Barnes); a 6th guy who has been excellent, and is a wild card (Wright); and two guys in AA who have dominated the level, but cannot go to AAA because there is no room (Henry Owens and Brian Johnson, both legit prospects). And that is not even counting Edwin Escobar, just acquired from the Giants. The organization needs to start figuring out what to do with these nine starting pitchers. Which ones should be in the rotation in 2015? Which ones could be turned into quality bullpen arms? Which ones could be traded for help elsewhere, especially in the outfield? This is made more difficult by the fact the best one in the whole group is probably Owens, who is not ready for Boston yet, but probably will be by late in 2015/Opening Day 2016.

Larry, I don't think arbitration is part of the QO process. Cespedes is a free agent after 2015, full stop.

Can you help clarify?

Cespedes is not eligible for free agency - he hasn't played 6 seasons. His contract merely prohibits the A's from offering him arbitration, which would *make* him a free agent. Which is why he is not eligible for a QO.

There's more to it - and this is why the "let the potential FA go, then sign him after two months!" strategy doesn't actually get done as much as one would think.

If the Sox traded Lester to a (probable) playoff team, they completely lose control of his usage. What if they put him as part of a four-man rotation for the rest of the year? It's almost certain that they'd shorten the rotation for the playoffs. What if they ignore pitch counts? What if he actually gets hurt in his sojourn over there?

If the Sox traded Lester to a (probable) playoff team, they completely lose control of his usage. What if they put him as part of a four-man rotation for the rest of the year? It's almost certain that they'd shorten the rotation for the playoffs. What if they ignore pitch counts? What if he actually gets hurt in his sojourn over there?

If the Sox traded Lester to a (probable) playoff team, they completely lose control of his usage. What if they put him as part of a four-man rotation for the rest of the year? It's almost certain that they'd shorten the rotation for the playoffs. What if they ignore pitch counts? What if he actually gets hurt in his sojourn over there?

What if they brainwash him into becoming The Manchurian Pitcher when he rejoins your pitching staff?

Team: "We'll give you a 5 yr deal at $24m a year; we'll do a 6th year that vests if you stay healthy and productive in years four and five at the same money, or it will be a buyout of $5m. That makes this a 5/$125m deal. Agree to it by 9 am on the 31st, or we will trade you for prospects to a good team, and then after the season, if you are still healthy, we will make a similar offer."

If the Red Sox were willing to offer that much, wouldn't they already have done it? Weren't the published reports from the spring closer to half that money?

Florida might well trade Stanton sometime in the next couple of years but not for somebody like Cespedes even if offered. If the Marlins need to spend money on somebody, they might as well spend it on Stanton. The only reason to trade Stanton is to not pay anybody Stanton money -- and get a farm system in return.